On Mon, 2026-06-29 at 01:06 +0800, Wen Yang wrote:
> On 6/25/26 20:14, Gabriele Monaco wrote:
> > +static void handle_example_event(void *data, /* XXX: fill header */)
> > +{
> > + ltl_atom_update(task, LTL_EVENT_A, true/false);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int enable_test_ltl_kunit(void)
> > +{
> > + int retval;
> > +
> > + retval = ltl_monitor_init();
> > + if (retval)
> > + return retval;
> > +
> > + rv_attach_trace_probe("test_ltl_kunit", /* XXX: tracepoint */,
> > handle_example_event);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void disable_test_ltl_kunit(void)
> > +{
> > + rv_detach_trace_probe("test_ltl_kunit", /* XXX: tracepoint */,
> > handle_sample_event);
> > +
>
> one typo:
> handle_sample_event should be handle_example_event.
Keep in mind that those files are not ready to build, users need to
touch them anyway after generation from rvgen. Nevertheless, this has
been inconsistent for a while and I should fix it.
> > + ltl_monitor_destroy();
> > +}
...
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> > +MODULE_AUTHOR(/* TODO */);
>
> Please use a valid string here.
Likewise, this is not supposed to build, we are just validating what
rvgen produces and that's the expected output, the user will need to
fill it with an appropriate string.
LTL uses a different approach compared to DA/HA in this template, I'm not
sure it's worth aligning the two..
Thanks,
Gabriele
> > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("test_ltl_kunit: auto-generated");
